Judgement_Dave

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think that it is so ridiculous that players use conceptual reasons to create there characters? Most of the people I know in game seam to base there characters on concept instead of playability. Many people that I have talked to in PUGs say that they choose power sets because of the look or because a certain power looked really good. They don't seam to know the best numbers for it. They want to have fun.


[/ QUOTE ]
Out of 56 alts I still have virtually every single one has been created for one (or more) of the following reasons:
* concept
* matching powersets (e.g. fire/fire)
* because a punning name came to me and the sets fitted the name (e.g. Failed Martial Monty)!
* because I heard that the mix had downsides and I wanted to see if it was as bad as I'd heard
* for an event (e.g. death races)
* to try sets that I've never tried before.

Even my fire/kin was made as I wanted a pyronetic with telekinetic abilities as a biog based on carrie/firestarter struck me as amusing... as a new player I mistakenly thought that gravs propel power was part of the kinetics set - so Pyronatrix ended up as a fire/kin.

Not once have I ever created a character because the powerset choices are meant to be 'uber'.

Funnily enough - I've not tried SS/WP - but like many others I might now... if nothing else just to create even more of them just for you to count.

[ QUOTE ]
Why on earth are we discussing how to dumb ourselves down???
Shouldnt we be talking about the devs raising the challenge bar for us?


[/ QUOTE ]
All to do with moving mountains.

If you want a challenge you can't get the devs to immediately produce one available just for you, but you can take some measures to limit your character and create your own challenge.

Of course we want devs to provide new challenges (and ones with the capacity to be a tougher challenge) but in the meantime, instead of moaning and whining...

[ QUOTE ]
Again, it is entirey possible to target specific combinations with minimal impact on the constituent sets.


[/ QUOTE ]
Of course, if it's assumed that some form of change is needed, then there'll be a variety of possible changes and one of the possibilities will have minimal impact/collateral damage.

But it's not always easy to spot which change that is.

With the number of ATs/sets/powers/stats that can interact (on both the playerside and mobside) the system is probably too complex to spot the 'ideal' change.

That's partly why they'll always be a continuing cycle of minor adjustments - each adjustment has knock-on effects or makes another power/set seem under/over-powered and so a follow up change is required.

Gets worse as some players will exploit any possible advantage they can find - and having many more players than devs/testers means that even the most minor exploit/advantage is likely to only be spotted by the players once it's out in the field.

BTW - I think you'll find that most (if not all) posters are probably for ongoing adjustments by the devs for game balance. But what many are possibly against is:

* Using the word nerf
'Nerf' is a loaded word - and can be loaded differently for different people. If you avoid using the word nerf you'll often get a better reception... Even if you explicitly state that by nerfs you just mean minor scaling back of powers there'll still be some people who read the word 'nerf' and revert to their own personal (and possibly harsher) interpretation of the word.

* Players calling for specific nerfs on the basis of overpowered sets
People have biased viewpoints. Players often call for nerfs on flimsy, partial data/analysis and their own personal impression. Everyone's viewpoint is going to be flawed in some ways - so calling for 'nerfs' based on these possibly flawed views is bound to irritate many. If sets are overperforming, then the devs will notice and will notice when they look at hard data from how everyone actually plays the game.

[ QUOTE ]
What if those devs are nerfing SS in I14 ?
I do think most of the ppl now saying only the devs can datamine are going to say the devs are wrong and stupid then .


[/ QUOTE ]
No - wrong again. How wrong can you really be?

If the devs do it because they datamined and found that SS really was overperforming and need an adjustment then they do so with actual facts based upoin how sets are used/performing for the entire playerbase. They'd be quite right.

This is totally different to a handful of players shouting "we did a couple of sums and SS needs nerfing!" without seeing the entire picture.

EDIT: to add an analogy - if I say it's going to rain on Friday because I noticed that it often rains on Fridays you'd all call me an idiot. I wouldn't expect the same people to call the met office idiots if they looked at all the data available and said that they predict rain on Friday.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
or is deleted then the next highest character will open up and be playable if there is no more characters the player may create a new character

[/ QUOTE ]

Before that page loads, you need to add the "vote on my power choice" screen, which sends an e mail to all players, to make sure your choices are ok with them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Still possible to get bias towards some sets.

Wouldn't it be easier if ATs and set choices were assigned by the server to ensure that under-represented sets get promoted? Failing to level an assigned character to 50 gets a temporary account ban?

[ QUOTE ]
start a /dark scrapper and take all of these leadership pool, tough weave, fly, stealth (notice no stam) anf then take all the toggles from the /dark set

and see how long u go without popping blues left right and centre

[/ QUOTE ]
At least everything would take endred and with all of the leadership pool I guess you could slot an endred in attacks instead of dmg/acc. Help a little...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hang on you quoted me, it wasnt me!

[/ QUOTE ]

Oops sorry. Can't have been my fault though, I'm a super hero don't you know

[/ QUOTE ]
Nemesis plot?

[ QUOTE ]
Btw if you rolled Db/Wp as soon as it came out and now its only 26 you either dont like playing it and theres no reason to be upset about changes or you dont play much at all.
Either way 26 lvls since DB/Wp was introduced really means you didnt spent much time at all playing that toon :-)


[/ QUOTE ]
Or...
Maybe he has the odd alt.
Maybe he only gets limited playing time.
Maybe he plays at a leisurely pace (and so doesn't PL to 50 in 20 hrs).

Funnily enough I rolled a db/wp on the day they came out - up until last week they were level 27. Now got them to 42 (still pushing for the Titan spawn event) and noticed last night that they've logged about 87 hrs.

So taking off what I've played in the past week, I'm guessing that it took that character just over 50 hours to get to level 28.

Only hitting 27/28 in 50 hours may not be up to your great standards, Moghedian, but for most people it is still playing a fair bit and plenty of time to become attached to a character! Your comments about not liking the character or not having a reason to be upset at your proposed changes are just wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone arguing against the OP is as likely to convert them as they are likely to convert the Pope to Judaism. For the same reason, too.

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean: The OP doesn't want to see a knife anywhere near their genitals?

Noticed that since the last patch on live I've crashed a little more than normal. I'll usually have, at most, 1 every couple of days, and often go for weeks without a crash.

But I noticed today that in the past c.36 hrs I've crashed 3 times (on 3 characters on 2 accounts) when facing Ice Mistral...

Each time they're pretty bad crashes - whatever is doing it doesn't let me pull anything other than CoX to the PC foreground - i.e. I can't even get task manager up to kill the client which just sits there staring at me and mocking me with annoying sound loops...

Anyone else getting this?

[ QUOTE ]
Our support team has had no further reports since 2:20pm so we're hoping the issue has resolved itself. We'd like to confirm this is indeed the case.


[/ QUOTE ]
GR - how does this tally with GM Romain having just sent the message out on Union (c.15:25) that:
[ QUOTE ]

[Admin] GM_Romain: Hello, please be advised that we are currently experiencing an issue with the Union server where players can lose their character progression when zoning into a new city area. Please note that this loss only concerns anything you will have done [...]
[Admin] GM_Romain: in the zone you would be leaving. This should not affect anything you have done/acquired for past days and more. Until a solution has been found, please refrain from zoning. Thank you for your patience and cooperation.


[/ QUOTE ]
Do you think that there is an ongoing problem (as GM message suggests) or not (as your past post suggests)?

EDIT: And do you now know what the issue is? Because if you don't how can GM Ro,main be certain that this loss only concerns anything you will have done in the zone you would be leaving?

[ QUOTE ]
One persons overpowered is another persons well made char is another persons average char is another persons brutes are [censored] im making a corruptor.

[/ QUOTE ]
Which is why I said the combination only appears overpowered to a minority.

All goes back to the only people who know the real score are the devs when they datamine and see how all ATs/sets/combinations perform in various situations.

Handily, these are the people to implement any necessary changes and they want the game to be a success - so I'd guess that the true info is in the best hands possible, leaving bored minds to argue about distorted perceptions and call for unneeded changes.

Is it an idea to postpone this given that the PI contact bug appears to have got worse?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion and in the opinion of about 30 players i know ingame SS/WP is the best combo for brutes.

Of course they dont want it nerfed, but they admit its OP.

[/ QUOTE ]


And that mate, is the sensible way to look at it. Listen to your 30 mates, you are in the minority.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually I may have read that different to you, Londoner. I read it as his 30 acquaintances know that it is overpowered and so should be nerfed/lowered in power, but none of them want that to happen as they enjoy being overpowered.

If something is overpowered then really it should be considered for a reduction in strength - the word overpowered pretty much states that.

The simple fact is that the combination only appears overpowered to a minority - and then partly because they are only considering certain aspects/scenarios in which the combination excels. To everyone else it's probably seen as highpowered with some weaknesses comparative to other combinations - which many combinations are without being overpowered.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good point, I stand corrected. People will gravitate towards sets they think are powerful.

Not "people" meaning you specifically. Or me, come to that. But the population as a whole will tend to grvitate towards perceived powerful sets (other factors come into play too of course)/

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I won't either. It's those damn [u]people[u] causing all the problems.

[/ QUOTE ]
Which is why a proper datamine by the devs is the way to discover if there actually is a real problem or just a perceived problem for a few vocal players/posters.

Got to also remember that not everyone reads the forum, not everyone minmaxes, not everyone reads the guides or plans a build to get a great build. Some people just pick powersets to see how fun they'll be...

I never particularly like putting in too much content that soloers can't see - just because not everyone can always get a team (especially if playing in an 'unusual' timezone or working odd shifts).

TF/SF/Trials I'm happy requiring teams - as they are especialy big threats to the city/islands/world/etc requiring a team to face - and this feels to be in a long superhero tradition*.

Just adding normal mobs that you can't meet solo feels against the casual-friendliness of CoX.


* feels to me - as someone who never really read any comics other than 2000AD so isn't a full-on superhero comic nerd...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Psi AVs can almost 2 shot Granite brutes, cause they got no psi defense at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Minerals?

[/ QUOTE ]

And One with The Earth, and Rooted.

WP is a little better against Psi, but it is far far inferior vs S/L and even worse vs F/C/E/N.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course you cant move at all with those powers active and you forget about the regen WP has as its main way to migitate damg :-)

[/ QUOTE ]
Given that we got here from your sentence Psi AVs can almost 2 shot... why is movement so important when facing AVs? Until the AV AI is upped the AVs don't tend to move that much...

[ QUOTE ]
JD has a memory like a book, god knows how he does it

[/ QUOTE ]
Aye - Janet and John.

See Spot.
Run, Spot.
See Spot Run.

Don't worry, I don't think it's a 'common suggestion' - but it's been suggested at least 2 or 3 times in the past nearly 3 years.

And it sometimes sneaks in when someone is asking for a nerf (as it did here) or complaining that the game's too easy - so it may not appear in it's own well-titled thread!

[ QUOTE ]
I guess a more complete solution might be to add a custom difficulty, where spawn sizes and enemy levels can be set. With the ability to customise SF/TF's to a point, and the mission architect coming out, it might even be possible to recycle existing code to do this.

[/ QUOTE ]
Supported this when it's been raised on the suggestions board. Keep the 5 difficulties that exist now (nice and easy for beginners to grasp) and add a highly customisable difficulty setting.

And 'so what?' if it makes it easier for farmers (as that's a common objection). Farmers will always find a way to farm - and if that's what they want to do and it doesn't directly affect anyone else then why the heck should they be used as an excuse to not improve the game for many others?

[ QUOTE ]
The "smoothing the XP curve" and massive debt reduction have really removed the challenge from most scenarios, regardless of AT

[/ QUOTE ]
Neither of these has anything at all to do with the difficulty of combat with the enemy - all they did was to up the rewards for success and lower the penalties of failure.

The OP is defending/praising nerfs - which would affect combat with the enemy and not affect rewards/penalties.

i.e. xp smoothing and debt reduction has nothing to do with ability nerfs.

[ QUOTE ]
I think he means vinyl singles. You know. The "Steal Nemises's Record Collection" mission arcs.

The mish where you steal his cherished original 45 of "It's Raining Men" and then ambush him in HMV is a favourite of mine.

[/ QUOTE ]
That explains Nems interest in meteorology.

[ QUOTE ]

...what was censored?

[/ QUOTE ]
45s - as it may be juvenile yanks trying to leet there way around a 3-lettered donkey or bottom.

[ QUOTE ]
One that really annoys me is [censored] not because "[censored]" is filtered but because "45s" is filtered because it could be you typing [censored] in l33t the number of times I've typed in "group of 45s round the corner" or words to those effect and its came out as "group of *%£ round the corner"

Grrr just really bugs me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Coincidentally, one of the 45s around the corner spotted you spotting them and told the rest of the spawn, who got exactly the same message: "group of *%£ round the corner"

Apparently it wasn't 45s that got censored is his version though...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BOTH SS and Wp are superior to the other sets, which has been datamined.

[/ QUOTE ]

When did they release those results?

[/ QUOTE ]

Look in brute section here :-)

[/ QUOTE ]
You waste our time with a rant then a misleading claim that there's datamining info in the Brutes board.

No there isn't.

There is a players look at aspects of SS/WP that seem to come to a favourable viewpoint. It doesn't really consider the whole picture (i.e. anything contradictory to the prejudged conclusion) and is certainly not datamining.

Datamining (which can only be performed by the dev/support team due to data-access requirements) would be able to compare performance as a whole - the Brutes thread does not.